Nice to hear from you!
On 5/31/07, Ian Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I'm Ian, one of the two students working on improving the regexp
engine in Vim for this year's Google Summer of Code. I haven't had a
whole lot to contribute as of yet, but now that work is underway, I'll
Hi all,
I'm Ian, one of the two students working on improving the regexp
engine in Vim for this year's Google Summer of Code. I haven't had a
whole lot to contribute as of yet, but now that work is underway, I'll
probably pop up here asking lots of questions some days.
Right now we're working
I have also heard good things about the PCRE (Perl Compatible Regex
Library). You may want to consider it as an option.
http://www.pcre.org/
-Brian
On 5/31/07, Ian Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I'm Ian, one of the two students working on improving the regexp
engine in Vim for this
On 5/31/07, Brian Gupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have also heard good things about the PCRE (Perl Compatible Regex
Library). You may want to consider it as an option.
PCRE is crap.
It is crap, because it uses the same, crappy, backtracking method that
Vim, and most other crappy regex (note:
On 5/31/07, Ian Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm Ian, one of the two students working on improving the regexp
engine in Vim for this year's Google Summer of Code. I haven't had a
whole lot to contribute as of yet, but now that work is underway, I'll
probably pop up here asking lots of
Ian Young wrote:
I have a couple questions to start things off. First: I couldn't see
much need for 'fuzzy matching' in Vim, but some of you are probably
much better acquainted with regexp use cases than I am. Would this be
a useful feature to have available?
As you likely know, fuzzy
On 5/31/07, Charles E Campbell Jr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I think could be more useful would be boolean logic for regexp. My
LogiPat
plugin provides this capability, but undoubtedly it'd be better if
somehow it could be
incorporated. The resulting patterns from LogiPat seem to me to be
On 5/31/07, Nikolai Weibull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What would be even cooler would be to use regular relations, as that
would allow for far superior substitution possibilities to what
:substitute has to offer.
(Someone asked off-list what regular relations were. If anyone else
is
